Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington functions according to a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
